* Any views expressed in this opinion piece are those of the author and not of Thomson Reuters Foundation.
Can Tanzania live up to its promises to cut red tape in its civil service?
When Tanzania joined a global initiative two years ago to make governments more transparent, many people rejoiced. We were hoping it would help curb the bureaucratic burden that characterizes most government operations.
Negligence and ineptitude among civil servants are salient features in most government departments. From the Ministry of Lands to the Treasury, the Immigration Services Department and magistrates’ courts, ordinary citizens face unnecessary bureaucracy, even when they are exercising their basic rights as citizens.
While the government’s decision to join the Open Government Partnership is commendable, a gruelling task lies ahead to change the mentality of most civil servants toward providing open and honest public services. As the government commits itself to promoting increased access to information about how the government operates and releasing data to the public, there are many hurdles to overcome, some of which are very disturbing.
I experienced a typical example of bureaucratic intransigence when I visited the Public Ethics Secretariat headquartered in the capital Dar es Salaam to find some information for a story I was reporting about a possible review of the Public Leadership Code of Ethics Law 1995. I wanted to review the Assets and Liabilities declaration forms that public leaders are required to fill out to declare their wealth.
I knew very well that the law is quite clear – no matter how controversial it might be – in that it allows ordinary people to read the assets disclosure forms, even though it is for “their eyes only”. The law makes it illegal for anyone to reproduce such information for public consumption.
The commission entrusted with safeguarding the ethical conduct of our leaders is housed in one of the dilapidated buildings along Ohio Street in Dar es Salaam.
At the reception, guests are required to sign their names in a hand-written ledger and to explain the reason for their visit. I told a man in his mid-50’s who was acting as a secretary that I needed to see asset disclosures. Surrounded by a pile of dusty files, the man was rather arrogant. “You journalists are very disturbing. Who told you to come here? And you can’t see them,” he muttered as if oblivious to the clause in the law which gives me the right to see what he called the “bloody assets”.
He later softened his stance. He instructed me to write a letter to the secretariat’s commissioner requesting the information since she was the one who is authorised under the law to accept or reject such proposals. He said that when I submit that letter I should wait for an answer and then I would have to pay 1,000 Tanzanian shillings ($0.6) as a perusal fee before I could access the files.
I didn’t bother to write the letter because experience has shown that my chances of getting a glimpse of the disclosures were slim.
No member of the public, or even opposition politicians, have so far managed to see the asset forms.
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
